IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI^" (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JANUARY w"' ^ TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE v- ' p \0 PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 1Q3S OF 2025 Between: 1. T Eeswaramma, w/o Late T. Sahadeva Reddy aged about : R/o. D.No.2-34, Subba-Naidu Kandriga village, Srikalahasti Tirupati District, v-' 78 years. Mandal 2. N. Muni Rajamma, w/o N. Muniratnam aged about 54 years, R/o. D.No.1-53, Aravakotturu Village, Srikalahasti Mandal Tirupati District, ...PETITIONERS AND 1 pe State of AP, Panchayatraj Department, Rep. by its Principal Secretary Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District Andhra Pradesh. 2. The District Panchayat Officer, Tirupati District, Tirupati 3, SubbanaidLK Kandriga Gram Panchayat Rep. by its Panchayat Secretary, Subba-Naidu Kandriga. Srikalahasti 4. The Tahsildar, Srikalahasti Mandal. Srikalahasti 5. The Village Revenue Officer, Subba-NaidVKandriga Village Naidu Kandriga ohkalahasti Mandal, Tirupati District mandal Tirupati District ' Tirupati District. Subba- ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus more declaring the action of trying to dispossess and lay road in the property of the respondents 3 to 5 in the petitioners situated in Sy.No.403/1 of Subbanaidu Kandriga Village Sri^gjahasti Mandat, Tirupati District, without following due process of law, arbifeary, illegal, unjust, viofative of the principles as ■ of natural justice, violative of the procedure contemplated under law, violative of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 and the ConstitutionatRight under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of property situated in Sy.No.403/1 Subbanaidu Kandriga Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, Tirupati District, of lA NO: 1 OF 2025 / Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to interfere with petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of property situated in Sy.No.403/1, of Subbanaidu Kandriga Village, Srikalahasti Mandal, Tirupati District including laying of road in the same, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI PAWAN KUMAR MALAPATI ^ Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2: GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 4 & 5: GP FOR REVENUE ^ Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI Y KOTESWARA RAO (SC FOR ZPPS, MPPS & GRAM PANCHAYAT) The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010019052025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3329] FRIDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA WRIT PETITION NO: 1038/2025 Between: T Eeswaramma and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of AP and Others Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1.PAWAN KUMAR MALAPATI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR PANCHAYAT RAJ RURAL DEV 2.GP FOR REVENUE ...RESPONDENT(S) 4%Hr 2 The Court made the following Order; This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: "...to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents 3 to 5 in trying to dispossess and lay road in the property of the petitioners situated In Sy. No. 403/1, of Subbanaidu Kandriga Village, SrIkalahastI Mandal, Tirupati District, without following due process of law, as arbitrary, Illegal, unjust, violative of the principles of natural justice, violative of the procedure contemplated under law, violative of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 and the Constitutional Right under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents not to Interfere with petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of property situated in Sy.No. 403/1, of Subbanaidu Srikalahasti Mandal, Tirupati District and pass such other order or orders..." Kandriga Village, During hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners, without touching the merits of the case, requested this Court to issue a direction to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioners from their lands, without following due process of law. 2. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj, submitted that the petitioners are continuing in possession of their lands and the respondents authorities would follow due process of law and requested to pass appropriate orders. 3 The petitioners are the absolute owners of the property 4. situated in Sy.No.403/1 of Subbanaidu Kandriga Village Srikalahasti Mandal, Tirupati District. As seen from the relief claimed by the petitioners it appears that, the respondents are interfering with petitioners’ peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property. When the petitioners are in settled possession and enjoyment 5. of the property, the respondents are not entitled to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioners and such highhanded action of the respondents would amount to depriving the petitioners constitutional right guaranteed under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India, besides violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Even assuming for a moment that this petitioners’ possession is illegal, still, the petitioners are required to be afforded an opportunity before taking appropriate action and in view of the law declared by the Apex Court in “Rame Gowda (dead) by LRs. v. M.Varadappa Naidu (Dead) by L.Rs.\ when the petitioner is in settled possession and enjoyment of the property, he cannot be dispossessed, without following due process of law. 2004 (1) see 769 4 6. In view of the ratio laid down in the supra referred judgment, the respondents are directed not to dispossess the their property, except by due process of law. petitioners from 7. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed. SD/- M. PRABHAKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// r % SECTION OFFICER To, Principal Secretary, Panch^y^aj Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District. Andhra Pradesh. 1. The 2. The District Panchayat Officer, Tirupati District, Tirupati 3. The Panchayat Secretary, Subbanaidu Kandriga dmm Panchayat Subba-Naidu Kandriga, Srikalahasti mandal, Tirupati District. 4. The Tahsildar, Srikalahasti Mandal, Srikalahas^, Tirupati District. 5. The Village Revenue Officer, Subba-Nafdjj Kandriga Village Subba- Naidu Kandriga ohkalahasti Mandal, Tirupati District 6. One CC to Sri Pawan Kumar M'alapati Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP for Pancha^^t Raj Rural Dev, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 8. Two CCs to GP for Revenue, Hi^ Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 9. One CC to Sri Y Koteswara^ao (SC for ZPPS, MPPS & Gram Panchayat), Advocate [OPUC] 10. Three CD Copies TF HIGH COURT DATED:10/01/2025 ORDER WP.No.1038 of 2025 ^ 0 5 MAK 2025 Current Section . mr DISPOSING OF THE W.P., WITHOUT COSTS